There's some other stuff and some more current stuff, I'll edit this up better later._________________...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.http://about.me/omardrake

Last edited by Darqcyde on Sat Dec 03, 2011 5:09 am; edited 2 times in total

The real-estate company that owns the small park at the center of the Occupy Wall Street movement has postponed a planned cleaning of the site, a New York City deputy mayor announced early Friday morning.

The decision by Brookfield Office Properties Inc. to delay its planned cleaning of Zuccotti Park means that the protesters who have been living at the site for nearly a month will not be forced to depart and remove the tarps, beds and other items accumulated during the ongoing demonstration.

“Late last night, we received notice from the owners of Zuccotti Park — Brookfield Properties — that they are postponing their scheduled cleaning of the park, and for the time being withdrawing their request from earlier in the week for police assistance during their cleaning operation,” Deputy Mayor Cas Holloway said in a statement Friday morning. “Brookfield believes they can work out an arrangement with the protesters that will ensure the park remains clean, safe, available for public use and that the situation is respectful of residents and businesses downtown, and we will continue to monitor the situation.”

A cheer went up from the crowd of protesters shortly after 6:30 a.m. at word that there would be no cleanup by Brookfield personnel on Friday morning. Shortly before the announcement, some protesters were seen packing their gear in preparation for the park’s clearing.

Protester Nick Gulotta, 23, originally held up a sign referring to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg that read: “Bloomberg Don’t Evict Occupy Wall Street.” People cheered and clapped him on the back when he scratched out “don’t” and replaced it with “didn’t.”

“It shows when people work together, you really can make a difference and make justice happen,” Gulotta said.

If I didn't have a family to take care of I would be in NYC in a heartbeat._________________...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.http://about.me/omardrake

I've been down to "Occupy Wall Street" twice now, and I love it. The protests building at Liberty Square and spreading over Lower Manhattan are a great thing, the logical answer to the Tea Party and a long-overdue middle finger to the financial elite. The protesters picked the right target and, through their refusal to disband after just one day, the right tactic, showing the public at large that the movement against Wall Street has stamina, resolve and growing popular appeal.

But... there's a but. And for me this is a deeply personal thing, because this issue of how to combat Wall Street corruption has consumed my life for years now, and it's hard for me not to see where Occupy Wall Street could be better and more dangerous. I'm guessing, for instance, that the banks were secretly thrilled in the early going of the protests, sure they'd won round one of the messaging war.

Why? Because after a decade of unparalleled thievery and corruption, with tens of millions entering the ranks of the hungry thanks to artificially inflated commodity prices, and millions more displaced from their homes by corruption in the mortgage markets, the headline from the first week of protests against the financial-services sector was an old cop macing a quartet of college girls.

That, to me, speaks volumes about the primary challenge of opposing the 50-headed hydra of Wall Street corruption, which is that it's extremely difficult to explain the crimes of the modern financial elite in a simple visual. The essence of this particular sort of oligarchic power is its complexity and day-to-day invisibility: Its worst crimes, from bribery and insider trading and market manipulation, to backroom dominance of government and the usurping of the regulatory structure from within, simply can't be seen by the public or put on TV. There just isn't going to be an iconic "Running Girl" photo with Goldman Sachs, Citigroup or Bank of America – just 62 million Americans with zero or negative net worth, scratching their heads and wondering where the hell all their money went and why their votes seem to count less and less each and every year.

No matter what, I'll be supporting Occupy Wall Street. And I think the movement's basic strategy – to build numbers and stay in the fight, rather than tying itself to any particular set of principles – makes a lot of sense early on. But the time is rapidly approaching when the movement is going to have to offer concrete solutions to the problems posed by Wall Street. To do that, it will need a short but powerful list of demands. There are thousands one could make, but I'd suggest focusing on five:

1. Break up the monopolies. The so-called "Too Big to Fail" financial companies – now sometimes called by the more accurate term "Systemically Dangerous Institutions" – are a direct threat to national security. They are above the law and above market consequence, making them more dangerous and unaccountable than a thousand mafias combined. There are about 20 such firms in America, and they need to be dismantled; a good start would be to repeal the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and mandate the separation of insurance companies, investment banks and commercial banks.

2. Pay for your own bailouts. A tax of 0.1 percent on all trades of stocks and bonds and a 0.01 percent tax on all trades of derivatives would generate enough revenue to pay us back for the bailouts, and still have plenty left over to fight the deficits the banks claim to be so worried about. It would also deter the endless chase for instant profits through computerized insider-trading schemes like High Frequency Trading, and force Wall Street to go back to the job it's supposed to be doing, i.e., making sober investments in job-creating businesses and watching them grow.

3. No public money for private lobbying. A company that receives a public bailout should not be allowed to use the taxpayer's own money to lobby against him. You can either suck on the public teat or influence the next presidential race, but you can't do both. Butt out for once and let the people choose the next president and Congress.

4. Tax hedge-fund gamblers. For starters, we need an immediate repeal of the preposterous and indefensible carried-interest tax break, which allows hedge-fund titans like Stevie Cohen and John Paulson to pay taxes of only 15 percent on their billions in gambling income, while ordinary Americans pay twice that for teaching kids and putting out fires. I defy any politician to stand up and defend that loophole during an election year.

5. Change the way bankers get paid. We need new laws preventing Wall Street executives from getting bonuses upfront for deals that might blow up in all of our faces later. It should be: You make a deal today, you get company stock you can redeem two or three years from now. That forces everyone to be invested in his own company's long-term health – no more Joe Cassanos pocketing multimillion-dollar bonuses for destroying the AIGs of the world.

To quote the immortal political philosopher Matt Damon from Rounders, "The key to No Limit poker is to put a man to a decision for all his chips." The only reason the Lloyd Blankfeins and Jamie Dimons of the world survive is that they're never forced, by the media or anyone else, to put all their cards on the table. If Occupy Wall Street can do that – if it can speak to the millions of people the banks have driven into foreclosure and joblessness – it has a chance to build a massive grassroots movement. All it has to do is light a match in the right place, and the overwhelming public support for real reform – not later, but right now – will be there in an instant.

_________________...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.http://about.me/omardrake

So where would a person who is tired of paying taxes so that the guy sitting next to him, making the same salary, can get food stamps to buy crab meat for 11.99 a pound while he himself has to buy food with his own money sit?

So where would a person who is tired of paying taxes so that the guy sitting next to him, making the same salary, can get food stamps to buy crab meat for 11.99 a pound while he himself has to buy food with his own money sit?

So where would a person who is tired of paying taxes so that the guy sitting next to him, making the same salary, can get food stamps to buy crab meat for 11.99 a pound while he himself has to buy food with his own money sit?

Answer this question: Are you in favor of reforms that limit corporate influence in American politics?

If "yes", then you should be in favor of these protest.

Let me ask you some questions: Why is it that if you are on food stamps, and your monthly salary goes up $100, why do they reduce the amount they give you monthly by approx. $130?

Why can we spend trillions on unnecessary military expenditures but not on health care and education?

Why do billionaires who earn "income" from hedge funds (others people money) pay 15% in income taxes while most people are paying in the 25-35%?

Why did GE NOT pay taxes even though they earned billions in profit?

Answer: The laws of the US are written by those who seek personal gain over what is in the best interest for everyone. Our country's current state is the most favorable for its richest people since the invention of television._________________...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.http://about.me/omardrake

The abuse is most likely in the form of neglecting their children. That $11.99 could be used to purchase simply more food. /Basically it's a poor decision that will just result in them having less money to buy food.

The REAL problem is if they AREN'T going without food then where are they getting money to buy more food? In the US food stamps gives you just barely enough money for an entire months worth of food (and that's if you only purchase the cheapest, usually least healthiest products). But it's supposed to be supplemental based upon your income._________________...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.http://about.me/omardrake

The REAL problem is if they AREN'T going without food then where are they getting money to buy more food?

Same place I do. Presumably making the same, if not more, amount of money than I do.

Or should I tell you of the woman in front of me at the store who got about $75 worth of groceries for free because of some type of voucher she handed the clerk, based on the food she was buying I will assume it was WIC. While she herself sported several diamonds on each finger of the hand she held her cell phone with.

The REAL problem is if they AREN'T going without food then where are they getting money to buy more food?

Same place I do. Presumably making the same, if not more, amount of money than I do.

Or should I tell you of the woman in front of me at the store who got about $75 worth of groceries for free because of some type of voucher she handed the clerk, based on the food she was buying I will assume it was WIC. While she herself sported several diamonds on each finger of the hand she held her cell phone with.

While I think the US could use a better and more efficient method of making sure their people don't starve, criticising Food Stamps in the way that you're doing is basically the worst way to make your point... unless your point is that these people should just bootstrap themselves out of poverty or something.

Abuse of any welfare system is inevitable, but it's also a minuscule problem in comparison to the benefit these systems bring (and in absolute terms as well) and should be the last thing on your list of priorities.

As is, you just sound angry that these people are in the same situation as you are, yet they're getting help and you're not. What these protests are fighting for (or what they should be fighting for) is getting you the help you deserve, instead of taking these other people's help away._________________attitude of a street punk, only cutting selected words out of context to get onself excuse to let one's dirty mouth loose